I'm in the same boat as many of you with regard to the 4th game (i.e. I think it was worded ambiguously), and have just e-mailed and snail mailed my challenge letter. To those of you who sent yours earlier (or later for that matter): Have you gotten any type of a response? Are you expecting one before scores are released?

I sent an email yesterday afternoon, but haven't heard anything back... i'm wondering if i should also send a hard-copy also (?), but accordiing to the LSAC webpage, the email should be good enough

ive got a feeling that we'll get a generic letter next week politely telling us to f%&k off. I doubt antyhing significant is going to happen, but I'm hoping maybe they'll offer an opportunity to retest or somethign without this score or cancellation going on my record

Haven't yet. But will before the week is up. Keep up the good fight brothers!

btw such letters might effect curve even if alittle so all you smart people who do not have problems interpreting english could benefit too unless you are sure you haven't missed a quesiton. so stop hating and back us up.

Last edited by Ragged on Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I wrote in yesterday evening. In the meantime I have to cancel, 4-6 wrong is too big a swing at the top of the scale. Based on my previous score, 167, I can only equal or beat it by a point with a slightly generous curve.I encourage everyone who was tripped up to write in. My feeling is this is a different sort of error than writing the rule's logic incorrectly (a->b vs b->a) more like (a->b vs c->d) The items in a relationship should not be in doubt.I admit this is all based on memory and there could be a clarifying remark somewhere earlier in the question. As someone currently in software, that rule, as written, would be considered a bad specification.